A question for cops or lawyers, or anyone with legal knowledge

Welcome to the updated THT!
If you are having trouble signing in, please email [email protected] with your username and we will help you. We thank you for your patience as we help you access the new site!

What kind of proof would be available 46 years later that would allow someone to be arrested? Just because the woman said it was true?

How does this work? If 20 years from now I say someone sexually assaulted me, can I just have them thrown in jail? Seems if someone really didn't like you, this would be a good way of "getting back" at them. Doesn't there have to be some kind of proof?

An 82-year-old man was arrested Tuesday after a woman said he sexually assaulted her more than 40 years ago when she was a child in Charleston.

Leroy Kennedy Jr., a former West Ashley resident whose current address is Freeman Street in Varnville, is charged with first-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor.

The woman said Kennedy forced her to perform oral sex numerous times between 1968 and 1970 at his house on Parkdale Drive and at a rental house on Folly Beach when she was between 6 and 8 years olds, according to the arrest affidavit from the Charleston County Sheriff's Office. She told investigators Kennedy threatened to kill her if she ever told on him, the affidavit said.

Her two sisters also reported similar incidents in other jurisdictions, according to the affidavit. It was not immediately know if Kennedy was facing similar charges elsewhere. No other charges were listed Wednesday on a criminal background check from the State Law Enforcement Division.

There has got to be more to the story (as a possible example, perhaps the police showed up to question him and found him in possession of child porn so they arrested him for that). The fact that the article didn't even address the obvious issue of statute of limitations makes me wonder how reliable the rest of it is.

Here, this is what it takes to get a warrant. There must be enough information, evidence "probable cause or whatever to convince a "reasonable person" that a crime has been committed....that "reasonable person" being a magistrate who is the entity that issues the warrant.

Here, this is what it takes to get a warrant. There must be enough information, evidence "probable cause or whatever to convince a "reasonable person" that a crime has been committed....that "reasonable person" being a magistrate who is the entity that issues the warrant.

NC is weird. It is one of the states where the ATF probably doesn't consider a pardon withou restoration of firearms rights be an effectivepardon, because even the governor cannot restore handgun rights with a full pardon and the ATF is very bad about interpreting sate laws to its own benefit. You could be legally permitted to own a rifle by NC law and still perhaps be subject to Federal sanctions. Same deal in Texas where your right to posses a firearm only in your own home is supposedly restored by state law after 5 years. In the past, ATF/DOJ has even gone so far to say that if you receive a general pardon without a specific restoration of firearms rights, but the state can still use your prior conviction to enhance a sentence if you are convicted in the future, then that is not a pardon for purposes of firearms rights restoration.